Department of Cardiovascular Medicine, University of Texas Medical Branch, Galveston, Texas.
Division of Cardiology, Weill Cornell Medicine-Qatar, Doha, Qatar.
JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2020 Nov 23;13(22):2658-2666. doi: 10.1016/j.jcin.2020.08.010.
This study sought to evaluate the trends and outcomes of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) versus surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) among patients with prior mediastinal radiation from a national database.
There is a paucity of data about the temporal trends and outcomes of TAVR versus SAVR in patients with prior mediastinal radiation.
The National Inpatient Sample database years 2012 to 2017 was queried for hospitalizations of patients with prior mediastinal radiation who underwent isolated AVR. Using multivariable analysis, the study compared the outcomes of TAVR versus SAVR. The main study outcome was in-hospital mortality.
The final analysis included 3,675 hospitalizations for isolated AVR; of whom 2,170 (59.1%) underwent TAVR and 1,505 (40.9%) underwent isolated SAVR. TAVR was increasingly performed over time (p = 0.01), but there was no significant increase in the rates of utilization of SAVR. The following factors were independently associated with TAVR utilization: older age, chronic lung disease, coronary artery disease, chronic kidney disease, prior cerebrovascular accidents, prior coronary artery bypass grafting, and larger-sized hospitals, while women were less likely to undergo TAVR. Compared with SAVR, TAVR was associated with lower in-hospital mortality (1.2% vs. 2.0%, adjusted odds ratio: 0.27; 95% confidence interval: 0.09 to 0.79; p = 0.02). TAVR was associated with lower rates of acute kidney injury, use of mechanical circulatory support, bleeding and respiratory complications, and shorter length of hospital stay. TAVR was associated with higher rates of pacemaker insertion.
This nationwide observational analysis showed that TAVR is increasingly performed among patients with prior mediastinal radiation. TAVR provides an important treatment option for this difficult patient population with desirable procedural safety when using SAVR as a benchmark.
本研究旨在从国家数据库中评估既往纵隔放疗患者行经导管主动脉瓣置换术(TAVR)与外科主动脉瓣置换术(SAVR)的趋势和结局。
既往纵隔放疗患者行 TAVR 与 SAVR 的时间趋势和结局数据十分有限。
2012 年至 2017 年,国家住院患者样本数据库中检索既往纵隔放疗且行单纯主动脉瓣置换术(AVR)住院患者的资料。采用多变量分析比较 TAVR 与 SAVR 的结局。主要研究结局为住院期间死亡率。
最终分析纳入 3675 例单纯 AVR 住院患者;其中 2170 例(59.1%)行 TAVR,1505 例(40.9%)行 SAVR。随着时间的推移,TAVR 的应用逐渐增多(p=0.01),但 SAVR 的使用率无显著增加。独立与 TAVR 应用相关的因素包括:年龄较大、慢性肺部疾病、冠心病、慢性肾脏病、既往脑卒中、既往冠状动脉旁路移植术和较大规模的医院,而女性行 TAVR 的可能性较低。与 SAVR 相比,TAVR 与较低的住院期间死亡率相关(1.2%比 2.0%,校正比值比:0.27;95%置信区间:0.09 至 0.79;p=0.02)。TAVR 与较低的急性肾损伤、机械循环支持、出血和呼吸并发症发生率及较短的住院时间相关。TAVR 与更高的起搏器植入率相关。
本全国性观察性分析显示,既往纵隔放疗患者中 TAVR 的应用逐渐增多。TAVR 为该困难患者群体提供了重要的治疗选择,以 SAVR 为基准,该治疗具有理想的手术安全性。